Join Over 600,000 Marketing Professionals

How the Information Age Killed Public Relations... and What You Can Do About It

Few PR pros know that modern public relations emerged from the propaganda war that raged throughout World War I. Sigmund Freud's nephew, Edward Bernays, the "father of PR," wondered whether the propaganda model could be applied to the private sector to influence public opinion during peacetime.

The era of conscious media manipulation was born.

But it's tough to manipulate (by selling uncertainty, for one) when the truth is only a Web search away. Edward Bernays's flavor of PR is dying, and we're in the process of watching a whole new era of marketing rise from the ashes.

Leaving Fear and Uncertainty Behind

Since the early 20th century, public relations has relied on a massively disproportionate range of access to information.

For example, around the time of the women's suffrage movement, Bernays was hired by the American Tobacco Company to help it break into new markets (i.e., sell more cigarettes). He saw potential in women, who were essentially culturally forbidden to smoke. He saw an opening in the suffrage movement and staged actresses smoking cigarettes at demonstrations where women were marching to get the vote.

His famous "Torches of Freedom" campaign positioned smoking—falsely, by using actresses and fleets of photographers—as a way to express solidarity with women who wanted to vote. It was a massively successful idea, and a whole lot of women took up smoking.

Think about how the same sort of campaign would go today. The smart women in charge of the suffrage movement would be taking to social media to say that women don't need to emulate the bad habits of men to gain independence—that they simply need the right to vote—and blogs would explode with posts about how men are co-opting the movement for financial gain.

Today, the average First-World consumer has easy access to an incredible amount of information, and the old PR model that created fiction to influence behavior is losing its effectiveness.

In the modern world, there are too many easily recognized angles to a story. Someone is tweeting from the opposition, someone else is launching a boycott over the blogosphere, and media outlets all over the world are speculating in real time about future developments.

Simply put, it has become much more difficult to sustain a false mass manipulation.

More Story, Less Spin

Today, people who want to make great stories can use technology to influence public perception, rather than shape public perception around a lie. Think of it like this: Consumers no longer buy out of a fear of not having something; they buy because the product has the potential to enhance their personal story. Progressive marketing companies such as SHIFT Communications and TGPR talk more about how we make and share real stories—rather than "tell" them.

This is hugely important for technology producers, as their products are all about personalization. Items such as Google Glass, smartphones, and wearable fitness technology were all created to extend the range of human ability, and today tech companies have a tremendous need to educate potential customers about the joys of using what they have to offer.

A company can take three steps to create and share better stories.

1. Forget everything you know about public relations

The general public doesn't like the entire concept behind "public relations" because old PR is a nasty idea. People don't like to think of themselves as people who follow the herd, and now they have the information available to make informed decisions.

2. Decide what you want people to know

Want to make the world a better place? You need to show people how your product is making an actual impact—and back up your claims with real evidence. Maybe you want people to know how your innovative product will simplify their lives. Let them try it for themselves, and they will tell the world for you.

Suddenly, "public relations" starts to look a lot like "education"—which old PR, as an industry, has largely abandoned. As humans, telling stories to educate is in our DNA. And with the right words and information, people can be persuaded rather than inculcated. The shift from "telling" something good to "doing" something good is the essential core, and you should start viewing your public communications function more as a broadcaster and your marketing more as privately held media.

3. Think about your legend

You no longer have to think about your "hook" or "spin." Today, your goal should be to think more like a minstrel. Create a legend that incorporates your company's values and gives people a living, breathing framework.

Today's smarter storyteller has an arsenal of case studies, statistics, founder's stories, and core values. Although Bernays staged a "Torches of Freedom" march, today's more authentic legend maker actually does something with his product or service to show its effect. Today's reputation creator enables real people to have an unbelievable experience and blog about it. It's authentic, with the story providing a medium to chronicle an actual transformation.

All this cannot really be called "public relations" any more. It's a new incarnation of marketing, where it's necessary to incorporate a real narrative. That takes mind, not manipulation.

Rate this

Overall rating

Add a Comment

Comments

Public relations is NOT media manipulation. Public relations is about relationships and to suggest that information is killing the importance of building relationships is just nonsense!

If you can't read the PRSA [Public Relations Society of America] definition of PR then you shouldn't be writing about it. You're doing more to kill the industry with misinformation than information ever will.

You certainly have a skewed perception of what Public Relations really means based on your antiquated historical examples. Obviously you have never been involved in a modern PR campaign designed to enhance the public's understanding of an issue, a product or a service. There is a reason PR is considered part of "earned media".

You've taken the worst aspects of PR, and in a sense, all of PR, and categorized it as "old PR," which does a gross disservice to a great portion of the industry. A good portion of PR has always been about educating various publics about products, services and issues. To ignore this for the sake of being able to create a theme that "PR is dead" is very suspect indeed.

Look no further than all those that handle PR for professional services firms. Most of what we do is about promoting issues and challenges facing our clients' clients. For an accounting firm, it may include how to strategically use debt to grow your business; for a law firm, it may be raising issues about patent trolls and how to protect a firm's intellectual property.

Hardly "mass false manipulation."

With fewer and fewer reporters to cover news, PR people have had to work harder to offer real stories to overworked journalists. And with social media, companies have the ability to blast out any information they want via their own social media platforms. At least when a story appears in BusinessWeek or Bloomberg, it's been vetted by a reporter and an editor. You can't say that about 90 percent of today's online content -- which is created by and for companies.

The "information age" did far more to boost the reach and effectiveness (and respectability) of the public relations profession than almost any other cultural milestone. Not only is this article's reading of what constitutes PR entirely wrong, it's manipulative to make a specious point...kind of like bad PR.

I appreciate the strong and passionate comments on this article! There's nothing I'd rather do than kick off a dialogue among different perspectives in the industry about what it really means to represent a brand--yesterday, today--and even more importantly, tomorrow.

Historical context in our industry is just as critical as in any other industry--ignoring it, or calling it old, doesn't mean it's not there. And like other industries, ours is also on the move. The bigger story is from where, to where? Today is only today, but there's an arc involved. For us practitioners, making that journey a conscious one is critical. My vote is toward authenticity.

Maura, PR is not part of earned media. Earned media is part of public relations where the media is one of many delivery channels.

Bob, I agree with you that this does a disservice to the industry, but disagree that it is the majority. The majority of PR people are in the business publicity [earned media] not relationship building. This is a serious issue and the case of a lot of the misunderstanding about the value of PR.

Chris, I'm not sure I agree with you about boosting effectiveness or respectability. It has provided a way to reach more people, but that's not necessarily a good thing. Playing a numbers game is a lottery - and also generally means the dilution of anything you're communicating because it has to be relevant to a much larger audience [resulting in a greater chance it'll be relevant to the people that matter].

Lisa, I agree that we need historic perspective, but I'd argue that this is about the psychology of relationship building in order to understand how to deliver the right message, to the right audience at the right time, via the right channel in order to build relationships with audiences - not just repeatedly shouting the same thing on the basis that the more you say it the higher the chances are somebody will believe it.

The examples of PR you use in your article to support your idea died out a long time ago.

We are not in the business of "media manipulation." Media are smart, and one Google search can debunk an entire campaign if we are not being truthful. So unless we are just terrible at our jobs, we are not building PR programs around manipulation. But if we are, we should not be practicing public relations.

I would say that this article only serves to add to the negative connotation around the PR industry, but anyone can see that this is no longer how we operate.

MEOW you PR folks sure are sensitive. I'm sorry, but I believe that Lisa is right on the money. PR is and can still be based on manipulation which is why many, many companies and brands steer clear of it. Lisa brings to light that it is much better to tell a story and let the public decide what they believe.

Thanks Lyndon, Brad and Maura for the strong stances. I hear that we can all feel, as Brad puts it, "anyone can see that this is no longer how we operate."

Unfortunately, that's not quite the case. Our profession can be insular. Two points--have you read recently what journalists think of common mass pitching practices promoted by some of the largest media databases in our industry? I know it's not how YOU do it...but it's how IT is often done, today, right now. Second point, if you have not personally, perhaps you know someone who has worked on a campaign that was not, shall we say, fully credible. The story sounded good, the evidence wasn't there--or was more vision or vapor ware.

Media is smart, but money is smart too and often it knows how to buy a good story. What we do in shaping opinion influences the world--it's a critical charge the requires we brings our minds and hearts to work every day. Keep in mind 100% of us public relations people are paid promoters. In other words, we are paid to take a situation, story or stance, and find ways to help it get more reach than it otherwise would. That's called "how we add value."

Let me make no mistake in my point here; I know we add value--but while we're slinging stories, and technology is creating a more transparent information structure, it's well worth pausing and asking ourselves where this profession delivers value, precisely. For example, 100% of business professionals believe in relationship building. It's not our unique purview! HR is building relationships. Sales is building relationships. Marketing...I could go on and on. We do have a unique purview, however, and it's not pure relationship building at scale. It's beyond that--it's legend building. It feeds building relationships for all other sectors if we do it right. My selection of VERY old ideas, like minstrel or bard, was not by accident.

Going back to the bones of our profession, before it was hijacked into manipulation (in the past or present depending on your point of view and experience in the industry), helps us recover our roots--and move forward for finer outcomes all around.

I am not surprised to find some of us on this thread don't realize many of the articles posted today are not actually editorially vetted at all, but bought, even at some of the larger outlets. In any event, I'm totally jazzed and inspired by the passionate defense of PR as practiced by some of the commentators. (Like you Lyndon.) I Clearly, you all are inhabiting a future I wish more of us were already in. Let's make sure we all get there. And thanks again for the dialogue. It's inspiring.

Saying PR is based on manipulation, is like saying that telemarketing is a way for crooks to cheat senior citizens out of their social security checks. If people are using various media and relationship-building methods to manipulate various publics, I wouldn't call that "public relations."

Sensitive? No. Passionate about what we do? Yes. Annoyed when it's mischaracterized? Definitely.

Bob, I am in advertising and Direct Response Advertising to boot, so I understand your sensitivity to mis-characterization. Some say folks actually think that Advertising is glamorous. HA!

However, I do believe that Lisa brings up a great point about what the internet has brought to all forms of media which is the need to be better with our facts. News reporters today can not fact check their information before news is reported anymore and the decline of the veracity of their news is declining every day. PR was built on spin, and in some cases has risen above it's humble beginnings. Not always. Same with all media. Sometimes we get it right, sometimes we don't. I'm only suggesting that maybe there's too much sensitivity surrounding her points e.g. thou doth protest too much?

OR worst case, I'm a DR advertiser that's enjoying seeing someone else's category beat up on for a change. ;)

If other industries outside of PR are pitching members of the media with mass distribution practices, then I guess I am insular in that I'm not aware of their tactics. In my brief time in this industry, I've never worked for an agency that bombarded media with pitches because we all agreed that that was bad practice.

I like to think I'm adding value for my client by pitching a story in a captivating and truthful way. I don't rely on smoke and mirrors to land a story.

Nothing comes to mind immediately that is comparable to hawking cigarettes in the 1920's. (Fracking might be close, but most people agree that it's harmful to the environment.) But if there was something similar, I'd like to think we would be sniffed out immediately.

I can't stop a client from telling me what to pitch, but I can ensure that it's truthful and not spin. It's the least I can do.

Relationships is the foundation of the definition that our industry body uses to describe what we do - so while relationships are important in other parts of the business, it is what we are paid money to do. The truth is that most PR companies seem to think that is only done via the media. That's like managing a relationship with a spouse via our mother-in-law or best friend. It's a very inefficient way to do it and, in many cases, the message will get lost in translation.

Imagine if the intermediary only passed on the messages that they thought were of interest to our spouse. That is why we communicate directly. The only case when we get an intermediary involved is if there is a problem - usually a separation or divorce!

Let's be honest, the reason that most agencies sell media relations programs under the banner of PR is because it is easy to commoditize. It's easy to package up and charge activity as billable hours, rather than actually helping our customers [internal or external] to build the relationships they need to build in order to achieve their desired commercial outcomes.

The internet is full of PR people bemoaning that they're not taken seriously; they aren't seen as strategic; don't have a place at the top table; aren't recognized for the value they delivery - but when we can't even agree on what PR is, is it any wonder? The industry is its own worst spin doctor!!

The current chapter (six) was written by John W. Hill, the founder of Hill & Knowlton, who apparently had an immense impact on the culture and values of this agency for decades. You will see very little of media relations (or manipulations) in his "How to use Public Relations Counsel" chapter http://ow.ly/wAL7T

Most people only see PR pros when there is a crisis and they are front and center. And since PR is so often associated with "spin," it's not surprising. Let me ask it this way: when are PR people in the public eye when a crisis isn't involved? And by this I mean, not standing back and off to the side when a CEO opens a store, or announces something positive.